There is a more fundamental difference than a mere shade of meaning between the pattern ‘ir śdm.f (or śdm.n.f) + adverbial syntagm’ and the pattern ‘ir wnn śdm.f (or śdm.n.f) + adverbial syntagm’, wherein the substantivizer wnn appears between the particle ir of the thematization and the nominal verbal form śdm.f or śdm.n.f. In the first construction, the adverbial syntagm is a mere facultative adjunct, and we have to translate the whole sentence without putting any special stress on it. But in the second, this same adverbial syntagm a fixed part of the pattern: the predicate of the nominal verbal form, which comes just before and acts as the subject of the sentence nominalized by the wnn. So, we have to translate this conditional protasis accordingly, by means of a locution such as ‘(if) it is … that he hears/has heard …’
